No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Of dogs and men: a note on Liudprand's Greek (Rel. 1, 21–23)
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 October 2020
Abstract
Unlike many of his contemporary Westerners, Liudprand of Cremona was proficient in Greek. His writings are full of Greek words and expressions, both written in Greek letters and transliterated into Latin. This note discusses an apparently corrupt passage in Liudprand's narrative of his embassy to Constantinople in 968, the Relatio de legatione Constantinopolitana, and reviews conjectures proposed by editors of the text. A non-invasive solution to the problem is presented that takes both the textual tradition of the Relatio and Liudprand's use of Greek into account.
Keywords
- Type
- Short Notes
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press and Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies
References
1 Liutprandus Cremonensis, Relatio de legatione Constantinopolitana, 1, 9–20, ed. Chiesa, P., Liudprandi Cremonensis Antapodosis, Homelia paschalis, Historia Ottonis, Relatio de legatione Constantinopolitana, Corpus Christianorum Continuatio Mediaeualis 156 (Turnhout 1998) 186–218Google Scholar, 187: ‘Pridie Nonas Iunii Constantinopolim venimus, et ad contumeliam vestram turpiter suscepti, graviter turpiterque sumus tractate. Palatio quidem satis magno et aperto, quod nec frigus arceret, sicut nec calorem repelleret, inclusi sumus; armati milites appositi sunt custodes, qui meis omnibus exitum, ceteris prohiberent ingressum. Domus ipsa solis nobis inclusis pervia, a palatio adeo sequestrata, ut eo nobis non equitantibus, sed ambulantibus, anhelitus truncaretur. Accessit ad calamitatem nostram quod Grecorum vinum ob picis, taedae, gypsi commixtionem nobis impotabile fuit; domus ipsa erat inaquosa, nec sitim saltem aqua extinguere quivimus, quam data pecunia emeremus.
2 Liutprandus, Relatio 1, 21–3, ed. Chiesa, Liudprandi Cremonensis, 187. Unless otherwise mentioned, references to the Relatio are to Chiesa's edition. Translations are my own.
3 See the introduction to Chiesa, Liudprandi Cremonensis, lxxxvii–xc.
4 Canisius, H. (ed.), Chronicon Victoris episcopi Tunnunensis, Chronicon Ioannis Biclarensis, episcopi Gerundensis, Legatio Liutprandi episcopi Cremonensis, ad Nicephorum Phocam Graecorum Imperatorem, nomine Othonis Magni Imp. Augusti. Synodus Bauarica sub Tassilone Bavariae duce tempore Caroli Magni (Ingolstadt 1600) 79–125Google Scholar.
5 Canisius, ‘Ad lectorem’, Legatio Liutprandi, 73.
6 See Chiesa, Liudprandi Cremonensis, lxxxviii.
7 Canisius, Legatio Liutprandi, 80.
8 Pertz, G. H. (ed.), Liudprandi Relatio de legatione Constantinopolitana, in Liudprandi opera, MGH SS III (Hannover 1839) 347Google Scholar.
9 Becker, J. (ed.), Relatio Liudprandi de legatione Constantinopolitana, Scriptores rerum Germanicarum in usum scholarum ex Monumentis Germaniae Historicis. Liudprandi Opera (Hannover and Leipzig 1915) 176Google Scholar.
10 Bauer, A. and Rau, R. (eds), ‘Quellen zur Geschichte der Sächsischen Kaiserzeit. Widukinds Sachsengeschichte, Adalberts Fortsetzung der Chronik Reginos, Liudprands Werke’, in Ausgewählte Quellen zur deutschen Geschichte des Mittelalters, Freiherr vom Stein-Gedächtnisausgabe VIII (Darmstadt 1971) 525Google Scholar.
11 Koder, J., ‘Liudprand von Cremona und die griechische Sprache’, in Koder, J. and Weber, T., Liudprand von Cremona in Konstantinopel: Untersuchungen zum grieschichen Sprachsatz und zu realienkundlichen Aussagen in seinen Werken, Byzantina Vindobonensia 13 (Vienna 1980) 15–70Google Scholar, 36.
12 Bougard, F. (ed.), Liudprand de Crémone. Œuvres, Sources d'histoire médiévale 41 (Paris 2015) 366Google Scholar.
13 Bekker, I. (ed.), Codinus Curopalates, De officialibus palatii Constantinopolitani, Corpus Scriptorum Historiae Byzantinae (Bonn 1839) 269Google Scholar.
14 I am grateful to the anonymous reviewer for suggesting this alternative reading of the contested word.
15 Liutprandus, Relatio 1, 22–3, ed. Chiesa, 187.
16 Liutprandus, Relatio 1, 23–27, ed. Chiesa, 187.